Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] William Hubbs council manifesto 2018-2019
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 00:03:36
Message-Id: 20180617000325.GB32738@linux1.home
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] William Hubbs council manifesto 2018-2019 by "Michał Górny"
1 On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 10:37:51PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
2 > W dniu sob, 16.06.2018 o godzinie 15∶26 -0500, użytkownik William Hubbs
3 > napisał:
4 > > I believe the council and trustees should be working as a team to lead
5 > > Gentoo. We serve different functions, so there is room for both groups.
6 > > We have been adversarial lately and I don't think this is good. As a
7 > > council member, I will work to improve this situation.
8 >
9 > How are you planning to achieve this goal?
10
11 The main thing that is important to me is to change the tone of the
12 discussion. Instead of accusations, the discussion should be about
13 finding what we agree on and trying to resolve, in a positive way for as
14 many people as possible, what we don't agree on.
15
16 > > I feel that we need better code of conduct enforcement and possibly a
17 > > more clear code of conduct. I will work with the council and the
18 > > Community Relations team to make this happen.
19 >
20 > Again, how?
21
22 There are several examples of CoC's out there that we could look at and
23 pattern ours after. I would start there.
24
25 > > The council should be asked to make a decision on an issue only when
26 > > the issue cannot be settled by the community itself. Innovations should
27 > > come from the developers, and the council should do what it can to
28 > > support these innovations.
29 > >
30 > > When the council is asked to make a decision, it should be fully
31 > > informed about both sides of the issue before it votes. On the other
32 > > hand, the council should not block progress by taking an extremely long
33 > > time to make a decision.
34 >
35 > What criteria should the Council consider when making a decision?
36
37 This is going to be different based on whatever the current decision
38 is.
39
40 My main concern is, we aren't in a vaccuum, so we have to balance what
41 we do with what the rest of the Linux ecosystem does.
42
43 The classic example, in my mind, of an ill-informed council decision was
44 the separate /usr decision in 2012. The intent of that decision was to
45 try to force us to support setups with separate /usr that did not use an
46 initramfs. It was overturned eventually, but the council should
47 have never attempted to mandate this in the first place, since no other
48 distros have done this.
49
50 >
51 > > If anyone has any questions about anything I have said here, please feel
52 > > free to ask in this thread.
53 > >
54 >
55 > During the last term, you have suggested that if an individual serving
56 > simultaneously on the Council and QA, then we're dealing with a conflict
57 > of interest. Are you going to pursue that thread?
58
59 I'm glad you brought this up.
60
61 I need to look back at my original post, but I don't think I used the
62 phrase "conflict of interest", but yes I still would like to see this
63 come to a vote.
64
65 It would not be a council vote, since it is glep 39 material, but a full
66 developer vote. There was support for it on the thread, and I have been
67 contacted by another dev who supports it. I do think it would be worth a
68 vote to find out what the developers think, and I would support whatever
69 was decided.
70
71 William
72
73 >
74 > --
75 > Best regards,
76 > Michał Górny
77 >
78 >

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature